Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The samples were not random. They were taken from every ethnic group from around the world which all show a specific migration out of Africa. If a seperate humanoid evolved in a different part of the world, they would be a different species. We can only test homosapiens because there are no other humanoids alive.
Was every human being tested?
Yes, from every genome around the world, from random sources.
Again, until every humans genome is mapped, its still 99.9%
Ask my sister what the .1% can do with an IUD pregnancy.
Dominant only means they may have both a gene for the pale-hair and eyes and skin AND the gene for darker hair, eyes and skin and will show the dominant gene for dark hair, eyes and skin.
Once the two mixed genes couple get together they have a 25% chance of having a pale hair, eyes and skin offspring.
However when two pale hair, eyes and skin people get together, all their offspring will have pale hair, eyes and skin. The recessive gene is not affected by it's time spent with the dominant gene.
The only other factor is that sometimes it's not just one gene pair at play but the principle is still the same.
Dominant means that when darker genes are mixed with lighter genes, the darker genes have a high percentage chance of becoming a trait. As racial mixing becomes more prevelant, the dominant traits will be passed down more often. This is pretty simple actually. Look at most interracial children. Everybody's going to look a little like Barack Obama in few hundred years. It'll be ok.
Yes, from every genome around the world, from random sources.
Again, until every humans genome is mapped, its still 99.9%
Ask my sister what the .1% can do with an IUD pregnancy.
It's impossible to test every "human" and it's not needed. Taking a representive sample from every population is all that's needed to conduct the study. When you find a living non-human humunoid, let me know and we can talk. For now ALL THE EVIDENCE WE HAVE POINTS IN ONE DIRECTION. I'm not waiting on your strawman. That's would be as silly as waiting on this jesus character.
Dominant means that when darker genes are mixed with lighter genes, the darker genes have a high percentage chance of becoming a trait. As racial mixing becomes more prevelant, the dominant traits will be passed down more often. This is pretty simple actually. Look at most interracial children. Everybody's going to look a little like Barack Obama in few hundred years. It'll be ok.
That's not how it works. The gene for blue eyes doesn't change in the least when it's paired with a gene for black eyes. When it eventually meets it's match, the individual will have the same blue eyes as the ancestor. It doesn't matter how many generations it takes for the occurrence.
Blue eye genes -- don't change. Hazel eyes has to do with partial dominance which is why two people with hazel eyes can have children with blue, green, gray, hazel or brown eyes. However their blue eyed child with another blue eyed person will have all kids with blue eyes (unless the mail man had dark eyes).
Red hair is recessive to all other genes, it's also recessive to blond hair.
Dominant means that when darker genes are mixed with lighter genes, the darker genes have a high percentage chance of becoming a trait. As racial mixing becomes more prevelant, the dominant traits will be passed down more often. This is pretty simple actually. Look at most interracial children. Everybody's going to look a little like Barack Obama in few hundred years. It'll be ok.
The other thing though -- the loss of melanin is preferrable in climates with little sunshine. You can't have a lot of melanin blocking UV light when there isn't much light or you end up with Vitamin D deficiency which is not good. People with less melanin have a survival advantage - they can live where there is sun or where there is little sun.
Why are some people so bothered by the term "African American" yet have no issue with "Asian American" or "Native American" or "Hispanic American"? If it does not refer to you then it should not affect you.
There was a time when some Black people objected to the term "black" or "negro"; they preferred the term "colored." Heaven forbid anyone referred to their "African" ancestry. The truth is that there was (and for some, still is) a negative connotation with anything and everything "African."
Even the "whitest" Black person in America was still relegated to confines of a second class citizen in this country based upon their having one drop of African blood running through their veins. Sadly, for far too many, embracing their ancestry is to embrace the false, negative stereotypes that are associated with being "African"
The other thing though -- the loss of melanin is preferrable in climates with little sunshine. You can't have a lot of melanin blocking UV light when there isn't much light or you end up with Vitamin D deficiency which is not good. People with less melanin have a survival advantage - they can live where there is sun or where there is little sun.
That's true in only a very few environments coupled with the fact that humans are now indoor inhabitants. How many climates do we have with little sunshine where humans live predominantely outdoors? I can't think of any. During the ice-age, it was a neccessity, but today, no.
Why are some people so bothered by the term "African American" yet have no issue with "Asian American" or "Native American" or "Hispanic American"? If it does not refer to you then it should not affect you.
There was a time when some Black people objected to the term "black" or "negro"; they preferred the term "colored." Heaven forbid anyone referred to their "African" ancestry. The truth is that there was (and for some, still is) a negative connotation with anything and everything "African."
Even the "whitest" Black person in America was still relegated to confines of a second class citizen in this country based upon their having one drop of African blood running through their veins. Sadly, for far too many, embracing their ancestry is to embrace the false, negative stereotypes that are associated with being "African"
It's impossible to test every "human" and it's not needed. Taking a representive sample from every population is all that's needed to conduct the study. When you find a living non-human humunoid, let me know and we can talk. For now ALL THE EVIDENCE WE HAVE POINTS IN ONE DIRECTION. I'm not waiting on your strawman. That's would be as silly as waiting on this jesus character.
Well then don't say its 100% fact. Its not.
Just like evolution. I believe evolution is how we got here, and explains the diversity of life on this planet.
But these are theories, not scientific law.
And when you say it with a definitive tone, thats when people rebel against it.
All I'm saying is, yes, it appears that all humans came from Africa, but that isn't a definitive fact.
That's not how it works. The gene for blue eyes doesn't change in the least when it's paired with a gene for black eyes. When it eventually meets it's match, the individual will have the same blue eyes as the ancestor. It doesn't matter how many generations it takes for the occurrence.
Blue eye genes -- don't change. Hazel eyes has to do with partial dominance which is why two people with hazel eyes can have children with blue, green, gray, hazel or brown eyes. However their blue eyed child with another blue eyed person will have all kids with blue eyes (unless the mail man had dark eyes).
Red hair is recessive to all other genes, it's also recessive to blond hair.
Nobody said the genes change. The dominat traits which are the darker traits tend to become traits more often when paired with a lighter traited mate. Over time those blue eye genes will become recessive. Obama's mom had light eyes. There's a slim chance that his children may have offspring with light eyes but not likely depending on who they mate with. Over time the dominant traits tend to take hold. Again, this isn't that hard. Just look at interracial children.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
